[Official] The Vinny G. Thread

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

I reject this position on philosophical grounds. I have good reasons for doing so that I am more than willing to expound on in another thread.

Needless to say, I see no stock in the claim of a default position and I can prove, quite empirically that a default position is internally incoherent.

You should drop it if you care about being rational.

Philisophical? Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. You can be an agnostic atheist, who says that they cannot know for certain whether or not any god exists, but that it is more likely that none do.

We just saw two definitions of atheism come up between you and me. I gave you a reason to be skeptical of your definition.

Therefore, you have a reason to be skeptical of your claim that atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive.

Neither of us want to butt heads over definitions here, but trust me on this. The popular definition of atheism is not the same as the historical and academic definition of atheism. The popular definition of atheism is merely the result of atheists chafing under the burden of proof of "Belief that God does not exist".

The redefinition is a rhetorical ploy. It might help you win arguments, but it won't help you get a full and proper picture of atheism.